Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 73 FSUPP 751 - Bartels v. Sperti, Inc.

Bartels v. Sperti, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1947

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
3
states following
September 1996
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 1996

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

120194719501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 216

Relies on 72 F. Supp. 21 - Boehle v. Electro Metallurgical Co. · Lasater v. Hercules Powder Co. · 73 F. Supp. 288 - Cochran v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co. · 72 F. Supp. 690 - Story v. Todd Houston Shipbuilding Corporation · Hearst Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Nor does the lack of jurisdiction seem any the less manifest because jurisdiction existed at the time of the commencement of the various actions. * * * The language of Section 2(d) seems clear and unambiguous. By its terms it excludes jurisdiction of any action or proceeding ‘whether instituted prior to or on or after the date of the enactment of the Act.’ * * * and there is no indication on the face of the complaints that the actions are to enforce liability for claims based upon activities which were compensable in any amount under contract, custom or practice.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is no mere technicality to require some semblance of order in a judicial proceeding and it seems little enough to require of plaintiffs that they serve and file a complaint which shall show the title of the action with the names of the parties, together with such formal allegations as may connect them with the claim for relief.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.